Chabad And Kiruv

[AsherO]

Oh i didn't see the quote bec the formatting put it together with the next quote

I had already fixed it before you posted for clarification 

[Yehuda57]

Oh please, of course it was elitist. By definition you're saying (or at least Freddie was) that the work Oorah does in "kiruv" and the work Chabad does in "kiruv" are not comparable because Chabad's work is the byproduct of 7 generations, etc. I don't know if that's true or not, maybe it is. But even if it is you'll still sound elitist if you put it that way.

Freddie can speak for himself, but no, by definition Freddie was not speaking of "the work Chabad does in Kiruv" but rather reducing Chabad to just a kiruv organization. Oorah's kiruv is a byproduct of its founders' approach to Yiddishkeit in much the same way that a Shliach's "kiruv" is a byproduct of Chabad's approach to Yiddishkeit. Those are very much comparable. But Freddie's post fairly objects to Chabad being called a "Kiruv Organization" because that's not what Chabad is. Oorah is exactly that.

[skyguy918]

Freddie can speak for himself, but no, by definition Freddie was not speaking of "the work Chabad does in Kiruv" but rather reducing Chabad to just a kiruv organization. Oorah's kiruv is a byproduct of its founders' approach to Yiddishkeit in much the same way that a Shliach's "kiruv" is a byproduct of Chabad's approach to Yiddishkeit. Those are very much comparable. But Freddie's post fairly objects to Chabad being called a "Kiruv Organization" because that's not what Chabad is. Oorah is exactly that.

You're only making yourself sound more elitist. He never called Chabad a kiruv organization. He wrote:

...what's chabads perception of other kiruv orgs

You want to make a diyuk from there that Chabad is a kiruv organization? Go ahead. The diyuk is lav davka. His question was how do those in Chabad most involved in 'kiruv' view non-Chabad organizations involved in similar work. The rest of the thread makes that pretty clear. Nobody (at least no one in this discussion) things Chabad is a kiruv organization.

[Yehuda57]

You're only making yourself sound more elitist. He never called Chabad a kiruv organization. He wrote:You want to make a diyuk from there that Chabad is a kiruv organization? Go ahead. The diyuk is lav davka. His question was how do those in Chabad most involved in 'kiruv' view non-Chabad organizations involved in similar work. The rest of the thread makes that pretty clear. Nobody (at least no one in this discussion) things Chabad is a kiruv organization.

I agree with you. That's how I understood Elit's question, too. We were discussing Freddie's post.

[Freddie]

Nobody (at least no one in this discussion) things Chabad is a kiruv organization.

Awesome! Then this whole thread was worth it!. Because now we understand that if you want to understand "Chabad" that means studying chasidus Chabad.

I always get a kick out the Federation and other secular, culturally Jewish orgs who want to study Chabad's "business model." The joke is that it's not a business model! It's a hashkafa in learning! I share that with you guys not as a "chidush" but aderaba, davka because I think you will get it.

[skyguy918]

Awesome! Then this whole thread was worth it!. Because now we understand that if you want to understand "Chabad" that means studying chasidus Chabad....

But it doesn't sound like anyone needed this thread to tell them that. Hence why you're coming off elitist sounding.

[Freddie]

But it doesn't sound like anyone needed this thread to tell them that. Hence why you're coming off elitist sounding.

Then I apologize for being boring and for sounding elitist. I'll stay out of the conversation.

[Yehuda57]

Who are we kidding? Most adherents to any sort of movement, Jewish or otherwise, will sound elitist when discussing it, especially to others of similar philosophies.

[jj1000]

Who are we kidding? Most adherents to any sort of movement, Jewish or otherwise, will sound elitist when discussing it, especially to others of similar philosophies.

I hope everyone believes their religion/hashkafa/way of living is the best one out there for themselves.

The problem is when people think their  religion/hashkafa/way of living is the only one out there.

[AsherO]

Then I apologize for being boring and for sounding elitist. I'll stay out of the conversation.

On the contrary, you bring action to this conversation, please stay

I hope everyone believes their religion/hashkafa/way of living is the best one out there for themselves.

The problem is when people their religion/hashkafa/way of living is the best one out there for every else as well.

FTFY.

[Freddie]

On the contrary, you bring action to this conversation, please stay

Action is nice but I'm not trying to turn this into a popcorn thread. 

Honestly, I find it frustrating that I am being told that I made a diyuk where there was none and also that I was overstating the obvious (tartei d'sasrei btw.) Let's just review my points. Somebody asked how Chabad feels about other kiruv orgs and I made a "diyuk" by correcting that question's premise and saying that Chabad is not a kiruv org. Then someone said that if "everyone were baalei musar we would need no kiruv" and I made another "diyuk" that he meant only frum people (which he admitted was his meaning) and I pointed to that as a prime example of the difference between an approach based on perek lamed beis of Tanya and an approach based on musar.

If my tone comes off as elitist, then I apologize because it it TOTALLY not my kavanah to antagonize anyone here. But the logic of my points still stand and it is annoying to have them dismissed just because we don't agree. Yes, we don't agree. We may never agree. I'm fine with that. I still love you. But let's argue intelligently, not emotionally.

[skyguy918]

Action is nice but I'm not trying to turn this into a popcorn thread. 

Honestly, I find it frustrating that I am being told that I made a diyuk where there was none and also that I was overstating the obvious (tartei d'sasrei btw.) Let's just review my points. Somebody asked how Chabad feels about other kiruv orgs and I made a "diyuk" by correcting that question's premise and saying that Chabad is not a kiruv org. Then someone said that if "everyone were baalei musar we would need no kiruv" and I made another "diyuk" that he meant only frum people (which he admitted was his meaning) and I pointed to that as a prime example of the difference between an approach based on perek lamed beis of Tanya and an approach based on musar.

If my tone comes off as elitist, then I apologize because it it TOTALLY not my kavanah to antagonize anyone here. But the logic of my points still stand and it is annoying to have them dismissed just because we don't agree. Yes, we don't agree. We may never agree. I'm fine with that. I still love you. But let's argue intelligently, not emotionally.

OP was not referring to Chabad the chassidus, he was referring to those within Chabad whose focus is 'kiruv' (ie shluchim primarily). Therefore the term 'other kiruv orgs' does not imply that Chabad's involvement in 'kiruv' makes it a kiruv org. This is the diyuk I believe you mistakenly made.

TBH, I missed your point about everyone referring to frum people, as opposed to all Jews. And it would've been a worthy addition to the conversation if you hadn't obscured it in sarcasm. Which is exactly my point. You could have just explained what you thought of that story/line and explained - without the tone dripping with contempt - why you believe Chabad takes a different approach.

[jj1000]

OP was not referring to Chabad the chassidus, he was referring to those within Chabad whose focus is 'kiruv' (ie shluchim primarily). Therefore the term 'other kiruv orgs' does not imply that Chabad's involvement in 'kiruv' makes it a kiruv org. This is the diyuk I believe you mistakenly made.

TBH, I missed your point about everyone referring to frum people, as opposed to all Jews. And it would've been a worthy addition to the conversation if you hadn't obscured it in sarcasm. Which is exactly my point. You could have just explained what you thought of that story/line and explained - without the tone dripping with contempt - why you believe Chabad takes a different approach.

You are proving Freddie's point that the OP doesn't understand Chabad from the get go.

He's saying no one from chabad is involved in kiruv yet everyone who is Chabad is a shliach and tries to do what he can to make this world a dwelling for hashem.

[doodle]

AMAZING STUFF !

[SamKey]

I have a question: Do lubavitchers hold what we are doing is ineffective and the wrong method? Are we living our lives, without chasidus, wrong? I've been told that by an Israeli bachur but don't think he represents Chabad...

[Yehuda57]

I have a question: Do lubavitchers hold what we are doing is ineffective and the wrong method? Are we living our lives, without chasidus, wrong? I've been told that by an Israeli bachur but don't think he represents Chabad...

Are you learning chassidus? Are you Lubavitch? No? Well, clearly that Israeli bochur was ineffective and used the wrong method!

He is wrong. I would have loved him to have shared a source. Maybe next time you can get that.

Chassidus is a part of Torah. Encouraging ourselves and others to study it, level of frumkeit notwithstanding, is part of what we do. That is not to negate other drachim, and certainly not to cast aspersions on others or their effectiveness. Learning chassidus /= becoming a chossid.

Check perek 32 of tanya to see the foundation of what should be a chossid's ahavas Yisroel. Dyswidt?

[skyguy918]

You are proving Freddie's point that the OP doesn't understand Chabad from the get go.

He's saying no one from chabad is involved in kiruv yet everyone who is Chabad is a shliach and tries to do what he can to make this world a dwelling for hashem.

Why is this so complicated? Are there not some Lubavitchers who spend the bulk of their time involved in 'kiruv'? Whatever you call them, it was those people I read the OP to be asking about. You're basically making it semantically impossible to ask the question, even though it's a real and legitimate question (which elicited really good and completely on point answers in this thread I might add).

[AsherO]

Why is this so complicated? Are there not some Lubavitchers who spend the bulk of their time involved in 'kiruv'? Whatever you call them, it was those people I read the OP to be asking about. You're basically making it semantically impossible to ask the question, even though it's a real and legitimate question (which elicited really good and completely on point answers in this thread I might add).

I think the responses here are trying to correct the premise that these people are involved in kiruv, though you're insisting on calling it that. These are some of the objections (please excuse me for paraphrasing) :

1. We don't agree with the term kiruv, the semantics stems from a hashkafic difference toward the act of assisting another yid in doing a mitzvah.
2. That person is practicing ahavas yisrael, a mitzvah for all of us.
3. That person is being mezake other yidden with a mitzvah.
4. Kol yisrael arevim ze la'ze.
5. Probably other ones which I missed.

[jj1000]

Why is this so complicated? Are there not some Lubavitchers who spend the bulk of their time involved in 'kiruv'? Whatever you call them, it was those people I read the OP to be asking about. You're basically making it semantically impossible to ask the question, even though it's a real and legitimate question (which elicited really good and completely on point answers in this thread I might add).

It's not so complicated, and many answers were good ones. But Freddie is focusing on one point that could be crucial to understanding Chabads point of view. And by not seeing that Freddie's semantics make a big difference to this discussion shows how he has a good point.

[Yehuda57]

Let me try put it thusly:

Here are a few Chabad characters you might meet:

1) A Shliach who has a Chabad House and deals primarily with unaffiliated, not yet frum folks, with whom he puts on Tefillin, lights Shabbos candles, and gives Shiurim.
2) A Shliach who works in an institution like Heichal Menachem in Boro Park, primarily teaching already frum folks Chassidus, but does occasionally put on Tefillin with someone he meets in a train station or Macys.
3) A bochur who learns in Yeshivah day and night, does mivtzoim on Fridays, says thank you to the mass transit bus driver habitually, and likes nutty chews.
4) a Crown Heights businessman, who deals with Jews and non-Jews every day in a business capacity with honesty, does his daily shiurim, and encourages those he comes in contact with to strengthen their connection with Hashem (either through Torah and mitzvos, or sheva mitzvos).
5) A DDFer who speaks to recon reps with respect and, ok, never mind this one.

So, only 1 "does Kiruv," 2, 3 and 4 don't "do kiruv" but occasionally dabble in it. 5 talks about it.

In reality, each and everyone is doing their "shlichus" or mission. Every one happens to include activities which you might label as "kiruv," but that is not the what defines them or the movement they follow. For 1 to put on Tefillin with a Yid, 2 to teach Tanya, 3 to make a bracha on a nutty chew, 4 to learn his daily Rambam and for 5 to act with Ahavas Yisroel, even on an online forum are all part of the same mission: to create a dirah Lo Yisbarech b'tachtonim.